In BRADLEY WOOD, on high ground on the plateau, but not on a commanding site, is a little entrenchment of an irregular hooked shape, which, if continued to form a loop, would make an oval about 50 by 20 yards, called by tradition "the ruins of HURST CASTLE".

At the NE. end, the bank is splayed out into a rather irregular circular mound c.40 feet across, which is hollowed out into two irregular pits. The cross division between them seems hard under foot, and a few more flints are found in the crest than elsewhere. The crest is 5 feet above the area, and the ditch is 9 feet below it and 3 feet below the level of the ground inside.

From this mound the bank and ditch run down to the SW. for c.40 yards, and then curving round, die out at the side of an old chalk pit; but there is no trace of connection between the end of the hook and the mound.

Tradition says that bricks and flints have been dug from the site, but there is no trace of them at present. It is impossible to say from the appearance of the earthwworks to what date they belong but they seem more likely, from tradition and from their shape, to be Norman than anything else. It is puzzling and unintelligible and appears to be most likely an uncompleted attempt to build a Norman castle. [Plan as on OS 6" 1910]. (2)

"I find from conversation with one of our labourers that there is a "HURST CASTLE" in BRADLEY parish...... the man..... tells me he has dug badgers out of the ruins which consisted of brick and flint". (3)

Parish of Bradley, in the Hundred of Overton. According to tradition, Bradley Wood, situated in the south-east corner of the parish, contains the site of a castle called Hurst Castle. (4)

The earthwork is as described by Williams-Freeman. The tradition that the building material has been dug from this site appears to be well-established, but no local person was found who knew the name 'HURST CASTLE'. The pits in the mound at the NE. end of the earthwork contain a few flints but no certain evidence of walling. The bank and ditch appear to be a part of a small ring-motte. In the absence of an exact identification, DR. WILLIAMS-FREEMANS suggestion that it is unfinished seems to be the most satisfactory explanation of its present fragmentary condition. (5)

This earthwork presents a problem. Whilst the profile, of the best preserved portion, could be that of a ring-motte, the suggestion that the work is unfinished does not stand up to examination.

Following normal construction methods some form of setting-out ditch, at least, might be expected in the northern half, but none is in evidence. Similarly, it is unreasonable to assume that the southern half of the site was constructed 'in toto' without regard to the remainder of the circuit. Finally, if this is an unfinished ring-motte, the presence of brick is difficult to explain - bricks (apart from re-used Roman bricks) were not used in building construction until the late C14th. No other suggestions can be offered as to the date or purpose of this earthwork which remains an enigma. (6)